Persons are entitled to receive compensation for all losses caused by defective and dangerous products.

A product can be defective in one or more of three ways: First, a product can be defective by design, where the design of the product contributed to the occurrence of injury and the benefits of that design did not outweigh its hazards. Second, a product can be defective by manufacture, where a product was not properly made to specifications and thereby contributed to the occurrence of harm. Third, a product can be defective by a failure to warn, where known risks associated with the product were not adequately disclosed.

Frequently these theories are combined and asserted together in any one lawsuit involving a dangerous product. Examples of well known dangerous products include: poorly constructed tires, improperly positioned gas tanks, food with dangerous preservatives, drugs with harmful side effects, components made with metal containing impurities.

These product liability lawsuits have two purposes. They compensate an injured party for their losses and they discipline a careless or unethical company, to encourage it to provide safe products and to engage in more ethical conduct. For additional information, see the article Product liability attorneys Los Angeles.

Was a manufacturer responsible for repeated bad welds on a police car seat back that failed, leaving the driver falling backward and laying flat on his back, as the car collided with a tree? Settlement "$confidential$". Thompson v. General Motors Corporation, Case ID confidential. Los Angeles Superior Court.

Was the manufacturer careless in designing the garage door opener so to avoid overriding the automatic reversing system of the garage door, and thereby cause harm and injury to the plaintiff when the garage door did not reverse? Verdict $837,814.36. Elliott v. Tandy Corporation, No. PC 019397, Los Angeles Superior Court.

Was an automobile manufacturer negligent by having only one spring to return the accelerator to neutral, instead of the two required by law, which lead to the accelerator sticking in a full open position?

Was a manufacturer responsible for a mini pickup truck that overturned when the tread on its tire separated while being driven on the freeway?
Settlement “$confidential$” Martinez v. Firestone, Los Angeles Superior Court.

Look at the California Approved Civil Jury Instructions for more information on what the law requires in order to prove a case for product liability. Jury Instructions on the Design Defect theory of product liability."